Vendor Questions and Department Responses.pdf

PDF 129 KB Posted

Attached to
Financial Institution Data Matching Services
Solicitation number
RFP-10241
Issued by
Leon County, Florida

About this file

This document is a set of vendor questions and department responses related to a Request for Proposals (RFP) issued by the Florida Department of Revenue (FDOR) for Financial Institution Data Matching Services. The RFP seeks proposals for these services in accordance with Florida Statutes. Vendor questions were due by September 17, 2024 at 12:00 PM, and proposals are due by October 3, 2024 at 3:00 PM. The contract resulting from this RFP will involve executing Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with financial institutions, providing data matching services, and adhering to various security and background check requirements.

The RFP indicates there is an incumbent provider, Informatix, Inc., who has been providing these services at an approximate annual cost of $75,787.50. The service is for delinquent tax debts only, not child support. The RFP includes several specific requirements, such as providing evidence of having executed at least 100 agreements for data matching services with financial institutions, preferably in Florida. The FDOR has indicated it will not waive this requirement or make changes to the MOU execution process or timeline penalties.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
DOR RFP 24.25-32 FIDM RFP - 9.10.24.pdf PDF
DOR RFP 24.25-32 FIDM RFP - 9.10.24.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Vendor Questions & Department Responses RFQ # 24/25-32 Financial Institution Data Match Services

Good Afternoon:

Questions received timely and the Department response are below:

1. Question: How much is the allotted budget for the contract resulting from this

RFP?

Department Response: The budget has not been allotted.

2. Question: Section 1, Pg 6 Definitions – includes P-Card, which is the State of Florida’s purchasing card program, using the Visa platform. This term doesn’t appear to be mentioned elsewhere in the RFP. Please confirm it is acceptable that a contractor does NOT accept P-Card as payment for its services and would instead prefer either ACH/EFT or mailed check for payment for services.

Department Response: Payments will be made using ACH/EFT or Warrant.

3. Question: Section 3.2, Pg 16 Procurement Schedule – Event Due Date – The due date for the RFP shows as 10/3/2024, but the responsive proposals to the evaluation committee is scheduled to be on 10/1/2024. Can you confirm that the due date is 10/3/2024 and not 10/1/2024?

Department Response: The due date is 10/3/2024 at 3:00 PM Eastern Time.

4. Question: Section 4.7.1, Pg 26 Work Location – Given that there has not been travel required since the start of the program, does the department envision travel needed to Florida for this project? If so, how often?

Department Response: The department does not anticipate travel. Section 4.7 of the RFP states: Throughout the life of the Contract, the successful Vendor may be required to travel inside and outside the State of Florida, but this will be at no expense to FDOR.

5. Question: Section 4.8, Pg 27 Background Checks – National (level 2) criminal history record checks require fingerprinting of staff. Will the department waive this requirement? If not, can the department supply the process for getting out of state contractor personnel fingerprinted as well as the cost for this?

Department Response: No, the background check cannot be waived.

Fingerprinting is done through the department’s vendor, FieldPrint, that has locations in all 50 states. A link with directions will be provided to the vendor that is awarded the contract. The cost is $50.25.

6. Question: Section 4.9, Pg. 27 Security Requirements – Our efforts to review Rule 71A-1 of the Florida Administrative Code show that Rule has been repealed. Can the department provide a current link to the relevant Rule?

Department Response:

https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ChapterHome.asp?Chapter=60GG-2

7. Question: Section 5.4, Pg 30 Renewals: This section states that “Vendors shall include the cost of any contemplated renewals in their Response, and the renewal, if any, is subject to the same terms and conditions set forth in the initial Contract, and subsequent amendments”. There doesn’t appear to be a space for including the cost of renewals in Attachment K: Cost Sheet. Will FDOR supply a separate Attachment to be filled out for the renewal pricing, or should the Vendor provide the cost of renewals within a narrative accompanying Attachment K: Cost Sheet as part of their Volume Three: Cost Data submission?

Department Response: Renewals are the same amount as the original contract.

8. Question: Section 5.17.1, Pg 33 Insurance Requirements – The Pollution Liability requirement would appear to relate to construction / environmental projects. This RFP pertains to data matching, which would be unlikely to cause pollution / environmental damage. Would the department agree to remove this requirement?

Department Response: Please disregard this requirement.

9. Question: Section 5.17.1, Pg 33 Insurance Requirements – Because our insurance carrier no longer includes a cancellation notice on either the policy or the certificate of insurance in compliance with industry standards, will the department accept direct notification from the Contractor in regard to any notice of cancellation or modification of any insurance policy within the stated timeframes?

Department Response: Yes, as stated in Section 5.17.1 of the RFP.

10. Question: Section 5.18.1, Pg. 33 Fidelity Bond – Vendor maintains both a Crime policy insuring against employee theft and dishonesty, as well as an Officers Errors and Omissions Policy, both with limits in excess of $1,000,000. Will the State accept these policies to satisfy the fidelity bond requirement?

Department Response: No, FDOR requires a Fidelity bond.

11. Question: Section 6.2.5, Pg 36 Project Plan and Schedule – Will new MOU’s need to be obtained for every FI currently participating in the program under the new contract?

Department Response: Yes

12. Question: Section 6.4.1, Pg 43 Financial Institution Data Matching Services Penalty – Currently the department picks the data matched files up from the contractor’s FTP server. If the department fails to do that within the 7 business days will the contractor still be penalized, or can an exception be added to that https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ChapterHome.asp?Chapter=60GG-2 penalty? Suggested language addition: “The consequence will not be assessed if FDOR does not pick up the data matched file timely from the contractor’s server.”

Department Response: Contractor will not be penalized if the FDOR fails to pick up the data matched filed from the contractor’s FTP server within 7 business days.

13. Question: Section 6.4.1, Pg 44 MOU Penalty – If the department is unwilling to sign the MOU’s instead of the contractor would the department allow a change in the MOU penalty to allow time for execution? Suggested change: “If the Contractor fails to provide a copy of an executed MOU to the Department within 14 business days, payment of fee will be withheld.”

Department Response: The MOU is executed by the Contractor, on behalf of the FDOR, and the financial institutions. The Contractor is required to provide a copy of the MOU within 7 days business days of the MOU being fully executed.

14. Question: Section 6.4.1, Pg 43 Fee for Each MOU Executed by Contractor – If the department agrees with the timeframe penalty change to the MOU penalty, we request the section that reads Fee for each MOU executed by the Contractor also be changed to the new timeframe of 14 business days.

Department Response: No change to the timeframe of the executed MOU.

15. Question: Section 7.5.1.2, Tab 2- RFP Contractual Services -Acknowledgement Form and Section 7.5.1.3 Tab 3- Attachments, Pg. 49: Tabs 2 and 3 both require the Acknowledgement Form. Should it be duplicated and submitted under both tabs?

Department Response: Yes.

16. Question: Exhibit 5, Pg 124 MOU – Given that the MOU is between the financial institution and Florida Department of Revenue, would the department consider making a change to the MOU and signing it, instead of the contractor?

Department Response: No.

17. Question: Is there an incumbent providing FIDM services currently for the State of Florida?

Department Response: Yes.

18. Question: Is the use case only for delinquent tax debts or is there also a child support component (states usually conduct both).

Department Response: There is not a child support component.

19. Question: If there is an incumbent, if so, the vendor’s name?

Department Response: Yes. Informatix, Inc.

20. Question: What is the approximate annual cost for services last year?

Department Response: $75,787.50

21. Question: Paragraph 6.2.1 / page 35 has an unusual vendor requirement, “The Contractor must provide evidence of having executed a 100 or more agreements for Data Matching Services with Financial Institutions preferably operating in the State of Florida.” My data company clients have in-house data acquisition teams and negotiate many data contracts, albeit the requirement to prove 100 financial companies, or financial companies in Florida is unusual, and seems like it would significantly reduce competition. Will the State of Florida consider removing this requirement?

Department Response: No.

Thank you for your interest in doing business with the Florida Department of Revenue.

Sincerely:

Ed Valla, FCCN, FCCM, FCPM, CPPB

Purchasing Analyst EXE Program/Office of Financial Management/Purchasing Florida Department of Revenue

(850) 717-7567 edwin.valla@floridarevenue.com mailto:edwin.valla@floridarevenue.com

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .